About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN 9
MSNBC 9
MSNBCW 9
CSPAN2 5
WBAL (NBC) 2
WRC 2
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 41
Search Results 0 to 40 of about 41 (some duplicates have been removed)
. it is for these reasons that i believe he is the wrong person to lead the pentagon at this perilous and consequential time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator inhofe. we have two former chairmen of this committee with us to introduce senator hagel. no senator has had two dearer friends or better mentor is i have hadtors than with senators nunn and warner. i want to welcome them back to this committee. i don't have to tell them that they are among dear, dear friends. it is a real treat to welcome you back to the committee. i will call on you, senator nunn, first. i will call you alphabetically. i have no better way to do it. sam? [laughter] sam, welcome back. >> first, for the record, seniority and age are two different things. senator levin, ranking member inhofe, i am honored to join my friend john warner in presenting chuck hagel to the committee and recommending that chuck be confirmed as our secretary of defense. i think it is worth noting that 68 years ago this month, john warner and listed in the u.s. -- enlisted in the u.s. navy to fight in world war ii. that was the start of
is virginia home to the pentagon, the world's largest u.s. navy base, but a hub for major defense contractors such as aircraft builders. so the impact over 200,000 jobs, second only to california. you can't want this automatic spending cut to go forward. >> you know, clearly this is not, david, the best way to go about trying to chroontrol spending. and we have demonstrated in the house two separate occasions -- one of the bills we put across the floor and passed i was the sponsor of for that reason. these are indiscriminate cuts. we can do a lot better. what i hope to be able to hear from the president in the state of the union is he wants to join us in trying to effect much smarter cuts in spending. >> but that's what he's saying. >> we don't have to have the impact that you just described. >> why not work with him on short-term measure which he is talking about to delay this, find a different way to go about some of the cuts? >> the problem is, david, every time you turn around the answer is to raise taxes. and, you know, he just got his tax hike on the wealthy. and you can't in this town
. yorktown, appomattox, the pentagon where 9/11 occurred -- there is a ceremony tonight i will be commissioned in -- there is a commission in april. we care very deeply about these events. one in nine virginians birth to death is a veteran. when you add in the guard and reserve and contractors, now you are probably talking about one in three of us. we care very deeply about all that is within dod. let me be plain, the threat that virginians and others are talking about now more than ever is the inability of congress to find a way forward on a reasonable budget compromise. that is what is in the newspapers and the headlines. at the direction of the deputy director, dod is planning for future cuts. i am very worried at the macro level about dod's ability to pursue and execute appropriate national security objectives in this time of congressional inability to find a budget compromise. the current cr limits flexibility, for example, of the military to appropriately taylor resources, we have no flexibility to deal with a shortfall. and to me, it seems like funding the military
that are about to kick in on march the 1st at the pentagon would leave us in a position of unreadiness. he says the devastating cuts are no longer a distant threat, and that the wolf is at the door. very strong testimony about his concerns in terms of what it would do to hamper our military if congress allows those cuts to kick in, saying that it would cancel maintenance on 25 ships, 470 aircraft. the list goes on and on. we'll give you more of that as he continues to speak about today what he sees as a dire situation for the pentagon if this happens. and there are some new concerns about the potential impact of these cuts, because just when our enemies are strengthening their military, our military is getting to cutback on the first of next month. we are going to ask a general what he believes the ramifications are for our country's safety. bill: also a doctor taking heat for publicly kreu criticizing the president's policies and doing it right in front of him. did he go too far? our panel will debate that as the doctor defend himself. >> there are a group of people who would like to silence e
. today secretary of defense leon panetta notified congress of the pentagon's plan to furlough 700,000 civilian employees, who, beginning in april, will be required to take one day off per week. in essence, a 20% pay cut. as for the current political geist, this seems to be more about political positioning rather than prevention. this afternoon, the president will sit down with local tv anchors to explain the adverse effects of the coming cuts. meanwhile, speaker john boehner is out with an op-ed in today's "wall street journal" entitled "the president is reigning against a budget crisis he created." the same budget crisis speaker boehner and 173 of his house republicans voted for back in 2011. as a reminder, this is how he described the deal at the time. >> you know, i got 98% of what i wanted. i'm pretty happy. >> what is making speaker boehner unhappy with the present situation? quote, no one should be talking about raising taxes when the government is still paying people to play video games, giving folks free cell phones, and buying $47,000 gre cigarette-smoking machines. joini
level that he had been waterboarded. he had practiced at the pentagon. he had been working on this. but when he referred to containment on iran rather than prevention of nuclear weapons and had to be corrected and then corrected again, a note was passed to him, and then the chairman helpfully said to him, containment is not a policy at all. that is not our policy. that is such a critical mistake on an issue that he knew that he was going to be asked about. we knew that he was going to have to explain the, quote, jewish lobby and take that back and some of the other things. the way he did it didn't seem crisp. and then when ted cruz wheeled in the tv screen to play an al jazeera talk show and put him on the spot or how he defended israel or didn't defend israel in response to a question on a talk show, it would be like somebody saying to you or mika, joe, you were on c-span ten years ago, and what did you say to someone who called in? that was very, very tough. >> that was sort of my point at the top. >> it's interesting that you had said, mika, yesterday as we were going to a meeti
? >> at the pentagon. >> this is the first time hearing of this. when did this happen? did they make this decision on the cruise ship? >> no. no, they didn't. it actually happened in washington. >> really? that's fascinating. >> which is its own permanent port-a-potty. >> okay. mika, for those of us that were just sitting there looking at a cruise ship for 24 hours instead of following the real news, why don't you catch us up with what actually happened yesterday in the news. >> republicans blocked a vote yesterday that would have ended the debate and allowed for a final decision one way or another. democrats fell just shy of the votes needed to advance the process. something president obama chalked up to partisan politics. >> there's nothing in the constitution that says that somebody should get 60 votes. there are only a handful of instances in which there's been any kind of filibuster of anybody for a cabinet position in our history. and what seems to be happening -- and this has been growing over time -- is the republican minority in the senate seem to think that the rule now is that you have
mitchell reports," the chopping block. nine days to go and with no budget deal, the pentagon announces upcoming furloughs for 700,000 civilian employees. >>> as his first speech as secretary of state today, john kerry issued a warning about the budget impasse. >> the looming days of budget sequester that everyone actually wants to avoid, or most, we can't be strong in the world unless we are strong at home. my credibility as a diplomat working to help other countries create order is strongest when america at last puts its own fiscal house in order, and that has to be now. >>> mending fences. president obama calls marco rubio and lindsey graham to talk immigration reform as john mccain faces an angry town hall at home. >> i'd like to respond to any questions or comments or insults that you may have. >> believe me, that is only the beginning. wait until you see what happens next. >>> joe biden being biden. the vice president's frank advice to parents on self defense and gun control. >> if you want to protect yourself, get a double-barrel shotgun. you don't need an ar-15. it's harder to a
is confirmed and sworn in." close quote. so if anybody's under any misapprehension, i believe the pentagon press secretary has made that clear, we have a secretary of defense. he has not resigned, and he will continue to serve until such time as his successor is sworn in. and i would just say again to my friend, the senator from illinois, the assistant majority leader, we all know what a filibuster is. a filibuster is designed to kill a nomination or to defeat legislation, as the senator from tennessee said. and i would say this is equivalent to what happened back in 2005, and i have a letter here, mr. president, i'd like to ask unanimous consent to be made part of the record following my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: and i will refer to it. this is a letter signed by chris dodd, our former colleague who served on the foreign relations committee, and joe biden when he was the ranking member of the foreign relations committee back in 2005. it's entitled "dear democratic colleague, we write to urge you to oppose the cloture on the bolton nomination tonight. w
that americans are com play september about defense cuts and cutting the pentagon. does that make it harder to sway republicans? >> i would point you to what republicans have said about sequester on national security and on our defense readiness. it is a fact that it affects deployment, it affects -- it would have negative impacts on army readiness, it imposes cuts to air force flying hours. i think that is a concern to all americans who worry about our national defense. but it would also, again, result in 0,000 kids getting kicked off of head start. it would rezurlt to cuts in mental health services to children. it would have cuts to teachers and to mental health care. that is to just name a few. to the jobs of first responders and others who would be affected by this. the reason why the list is so long because the sequester was written to be broad and, therefore, not to become policy. we call on congress to take reasonable and appropriate action, to pass legislation that would buy down the sequester, postpone the sequester with a package of spending cuts and revenue increase. we're makin
from georgetown, serve as my chief of staff at the c.i.a. and then followed me to the pentagon as my chief of staff. and also someone who's had a public affairs at the pentagon, george little, who is also someone who both graduated and later taught here at georgetown. talented young individuals who have been at my side every day for the last four years at both the c.i.a. and the pentagon, and i am deeply grateful for their work for me and on behalf of the nation and i am deeply grateful for georgetown for training such extraordinary public servants. and speaking of extraordinary public servants, i think many in this audience know that there's a georgetown professor that the president has nominated to serve as the next secretary of defense, chuck hagel, and i am confident and i've expressed that confidence publicly that the men and women of the department of defense will have the kind of advocate they need as the nation emerges from more than a decade of war. lastly, i'm honored to be here, as i said, as a catholic and as a proud graduate of another jesuit institution, santa clara uni
return home, and i admit that when we first asked him to lead the pentagon, his answer was simple -- no. but i kept asking him. i am persistent. that is how michelle married me. i just kept at it, and it is a testament to his patriotism, to his sense of duty, that leon agreed to serve on this one last tour. perhaps it was the memory of his parents and opening their homes up to gi's added to the pacific, perhaps leon served himself, a young lieutenant in the army. perhaps it was the experience of watching his youngest son deployed to afghanistan. what we do know is this -- as our nation's's 23rd secretary of defense and every action beyond panetta has taken, every decision he has made has been with one goal in mind -- taking care of our sons and our daughters in uniform and keeping america safe. just think of the progress under his watch. because we ended the war in iraq, winding down the war in afghanistan, our troops are coming home, and next year our war in afghanistan will come to an end. we have put the core of al qaeda on the path to defeat. we have been relentless against its affi
have trouble managing the pentagon and bring in any reforms he might want to do. it sets up the idea, is this going to be business as usual? it is an unprecedented move to filibuster a defense nominee in the area of national security. first time it's ever happened. but could this be the norm? >> let's talk about senator john mccain who heightened a few issues here the republicans have with chuck hagel. >> to be honest with you, it goes back to, there's a lot of ill-will towards senator hagel because when he was a republican, he attacked president bush mercilessly, at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover, said that the surge was the worst blunder since the vietnam war, which is nonsense. and was very anti-his own party and people. people don't forget that. you can disagree but if you're disagreeable, people don't forget that. >> what do you think is the gop's strategy here and is there a sense at all that they might be creating more bad p.r. for the party because hagel appears to be on his way to being confirmed anyway? you heard david saying that they're jus
kill tv, jay johnson, a pentagon stop lawyer admitted, quote, if i were catholic i'd have to go to confession, unquote. mr. petraeus' departure presents mr. obama with an opportunity to halt the c.i.a.'s drift toward becoming a paramilitary organization and put it back on course. for all the technological advances america's made in the decade of fighting al qaeda, it still needs all the old tricks it learned in the day before spy satellites and droughns drones. more and better human intelligence in sources on the ground will result in more accurate targeting. that would be a yemen model that actually worked and a lasting and more effective counterterrorism legacy for mr. obama's second term. gregory johnson from "the new york times." another good article by patrick pool on june 6 of 2012. obama's assassination czar, a relatively unnoticed article, this is from the article, quoting, by associated press reporter kimberly dozer two weeks ago outlining new obama administration policy changes which consolidated power for authorizing drone attacks and assassinations under political ap
it through the bureaucracies of the pentagon. america needs chuck as our secretary of defense to bring our troops home and keep our military the strongest in the world. sergeant hagel was an american hero. when so many americans were dodging the draft he volunteered to serve in vietnam. the draft board gave him the option to return to college but chuck refused. he said i think the best thing for me is to go in the army. it may not be the best thing for the army but i think that's the way to get all this straightened out. yfsz the oldest of four boys, he said, my sphawr passed away and i just was not coming together the way i should. there was a war going on in vietnam, i felt a sense of some responsibility so i said no, i think it's time to go. and so i volunteered for the draft. went in the army and celebrated my 21st birthday in white sands missile range. and chuck didn't serve in a safe bullet. when assigned to germany he volunteered for vietnam and saw the horrors of war as an infrant fantdry sergeant. he hand his brother tom are the only known american brothers to serve side by side i
stopper in all of this, wolf. >> thank you very much, barbara starr at pentagon. >>> up next here in "the situation room," a feud involving the actor alec baldwin and a new york post photographer. there's different versions about what happened. that's coming up next. the ones with the strong shoulder to lean on, the ones we're named after, and the ones named after us. it takes all kinds of good to make a family. at new york life, everything we do is to help you keep good going. music: "make someone happy" music: "make someone happy" ♪it's so important to make someone happy.♪ it's so important to make meone happy.♪ ♪make just one someone happy ♪and you will be happy too. then you're going to love this. right now they're only $14.95! wow-a grt deal just got a whole lot better. hurry. $14.95 won't last. >>> here's a look at this hour's hot shots. in new york, thousands line the streets to mark the year of the snake at the festival last sunday. >>> in bali, a beautiful sunset over the water. >>> in california, paragliders come in for a landing over the beach. send in your photos to
that the pentagon is preparing for furloughs even as obama hammers republicans on the sequester, he's reaching out on immigration. he placed calls to marco rubio, and john mccain -- >> they are sticking their necks out on this issue. what is frustrating for them, which you saw expressed in some of the things rubio said and paul ryan has said in the last couple of days, if they are going to stick their necks outs, they want to feel they have a partner with the white house. >> joining me right now is democratic congressman eric shifz zer. let's dive in to bring everybody up to speed on where we stand with nine days out on the quester. interesting with the piece out by john boehner, carney has tweeted out, speaker boehner is rewriting history in the op-ed for getting he said i got 98% of what i wanted when he and 173 house rs voted for the sequester. are you surprised by the game of chicken being played in washington, d.c., especially when it comes to the amount of cuts that are coming on march 1st? >> i wish i could say i'm surprised but we've seen enough over the last year and a half not to be surp
meat rhetoric, a warning from leon panetta that the pentagon is preparing for furloughs even as obama hammers republicans on the sequester, he's reaching out on immigration. he placed calls to marco rubio, and john mccain -- >> they are sticking their necks out on this issue. what is frustrating for them, which you saw expressed in some of the things rubio said and paul ryan has said in the last couple of days, if they are going to stick their necks outs, they want to feel they have a partner with the white house. >> joining me right now is democratic congressman eric shifz zer. let's dive in to bring everybody up to speed on where we stand with nine days out on the quester. interesting with the piece out by john boehner, carney has tweeted out, speaker boehner is rewriting history in the op-ed for getting he said i got 98% of what i wanted when he and 173 house rs voted for the sequester. are you surprised by the game of chicken being played in washington, d.c., especially when it comes to the amount of cuts that are coming on march 1st? >> i wish i could say i'm surprised but we've
the pentagon is suggesting there will be 700,000 civilian layoffs. real people are being effected now, but everyone expects this will kick in in nine days and then, i guess, the white house thinks they'll negotiate the continuing resolution and some sort of an agreement will occur magically before the end of march. republicans still say they won't buy into any taxes. so we haven't bridged any of these gaps. >> we haven't, andrea. look, i know the president came out and gave a statement yesterday sort of expressing his desire for a deal, but i think this is really about -- and republicans are doing this too -- about positioning for march 2nd and beyond. no one expects a congress, who isn't even here this week, they are taking the president's week off, fine with me if i had that week off. they are taking this week off. next week they are back. congress doesn't get big budget deals done in eight days' time, seven days' time. the political positioning to see who has the upper hand in the negotiations that, in theory, will go on once we past march 1st and the cuts, as you point out which w
the pentagon and military posts have strong seasoned leadership teams. regardless of having the secretary or not having one is a portent concern. -- a point of concern. you have a good strong team that will be able to manage through this process. they have seen this coming. as you would expect the military to do, they are prepared. host: new hampshire, and the pennant caller -- caller: morning and thank you. i am so tired of the irresponsibility of the republicans. the chuck hagel thing is preposterous. how does it serve the nation to delay the president's choice? it is the first time in history that a filibuster has been used against a cabinet the sequester is the height of irresponsibility. why risk a potential double dip recession just so you can score political points? finally, you criticized the president for being out of washington and yet, -- that was and finally -- hear you are supporting a filibuster and finally, though you partly answer the question or just now, what your district and tails are large installations, i assume, other than fort campbell in your district. my brother
reasons, the pentagon and the planners have made their own case to the president. and with the new resource problem we confronted in mali, look what it took to support french against al qaeda sub contractors. if we can't do that when in fact americans are held hostage and killed, what kind of response do you really expect for . >> is that a consequence of the u.s. not getting involved in mali earlier? >> what is the implication from that we in effect need to be involved -- . >> the u.s. has been concerned about mali for at least eight nows. -- months only now there's a discussion about where we should do more. >> look, in the time of the great extra cater. we are -- that -- what is threaten, our foreign policy is not manic interventionism right now. that's not what we have to worry about here. >> let's move on. if you have a question, raise your hand. i'm going ask you to identify yourself. keep your question short. let's go to [inaudible] of radio-- and then go to the woman right here in the black and hand the microphone to her. >> hi, my name is -- [inaudible] that syria is part
of improving efficiency within the pentagon. i would say that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is focused on readiness and training, which is absolutely true. if you talk to the lawyers that work with the defense contractors, they think they will have a field day care and some had testimony last year that the legal hassles emanating from sequestration may eat up a lot of their savings. but beyond that, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. and what we do is try to develop capability to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can prepare for future contingencies. the point is that it does not just readiness. it hurts us in the real world today. there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration's savings for other more targeted savings so that you save this amount of money, you're still fiscally responsible, but you don't get defense and these domestic p
the president for lost funding in federal programs and the pentagon over ten years, should the sequestration take place. house speaker john boehner said, quote, today the president advanced an argument republicans have been making for a year. his sequester is the wrong way to cut spending. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell insisted "more than three months after the november election, president obama still prefers campaign events to common sense, bipartisan action." and joining us now for more on this from washington, the former chief economist of the international monetary fund and bloomberg view columnist, simon johnson. he's the co-author of "white house burning: our national debt and why it matters to you," now out in paperback. simon, good to see you this morning. >> nice to be with you. >> simon, if you could help us through this over the next week or so, it doesn't look like there's a path to avoiding the sequestration if you listen to the two sides. so how damaging would this be? because we've heard a couple different versions of it that would have immediate impacts, more than 75
washington post" that we needed to reduce dod as a reason to improve efficiency within the pentagon. that applies to all the other agencies as well. secondly, most of the concern about sequestration is about readiness. which is absolutely true. if you talk about the lawyers that work as defense contractors, they believe that they will have a field day. we have even had testimony last year that the legal household emanating from sequestration making up a lot of the savings. but beyond that, as senator ayotte and senator lindsey reference, there are a lot of dangerous places in the world. but we do is try to develop capabilities to deal with the unknowable contingencies of what could happen at a place like syria or iran or north korea. with less money, you can perform with fewer contingencies. this hurts us in the real world today. my final point is there are lots of options to deal with this. as was mentioned, the house passed bills twice last year to substitute sequestration savings for other more or other more targeted savings, so the same amount of money, and these domestic progra
until today to make these announcements. do you accept the criticism that the pentagon should have been we listed every major item we are talking about. we said we had to do furloughs. we said there would be cutbacks in readiness. we said unit costs would go up. all the same things. what we didn't do with a detailed budget planning and i don't regret that. we wouldn't have known the effects of the continuing resolution. we wouldn't have known that congress is going to change the size and the. moreover, we would have incurred the productivity and we would v done it six months ago, so i don't regret not doing that. i think we did sound the alarm in every way we could. >> i am wondering what kind of contract you are having with the white house and with congress there is going to have to be some. so are you trying to offer any solutions? also, i am wondering, what other things would you be doing right now if you were not spending all your time on this sequester. >> spending time with my wife -- i think i am hot the right person to answer. we are responsible for providing the nation's securi
on that "washington post" article that came out recently. it did suggest that the pentagon is pushing a plan that we keep on about 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the planning process thus far, but can you supported plan that would scheduled withdrawal of troops in advance? you know, we are looking at withdrawal of troops in afghanistan, and according to this article from about 8000 down to 1000 within a very short period of time. i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdrawal when, as you stated previously, so much depends upon conditions on the ground, what the government is doing, what their abilities are up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood what the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. and i certainly, my advice as a commander on the ground or commander of central command, i would provide my advice based upon where i think the security forces are, a
Search Results 0 to 40 of about 41 (some duplicates have been removed)